iortiz

Yes DC is a big market place in the US (8?.. not even in the top 3? but interesting). They play in the same market but they definitely do not have the same fan-base in their own hometown/US or around the world. Hence, their media market is abysmal local/US/Around the world. Also, DC is nothing if you take a global perspective. Only a handful are big/global market teams in professional sports around the world. (Real Madrid, Barcelona, Dallas Cowboys, Yankees, Manchester Utd. Lakers, etc.). The Nats are not in that category, not even close. The population/density that these teams cover is worldwide (worldwide media market). The Natas are not in that category, not even close. The Nats are not a big market team. First, They have to win loyalty in their own hometown. In order to do that, they have to win championships since they are young franchise. It is going to take time. Let me put this in perspective. Soccer. El Atletico de Madrid plays in the most important spain market (Madrid), they have a lot of money but they are not a global/big market team, not even close. On the other hand, look at El Real Madrid, they are definitely a global/big market team. Between them, theres an abysm. They are not in the same category. The same applies for Nats/Skins. Football. Steelers do not play in a big market city like DC but they are a global market team. They have a huge fan-base world wide (hence world wide media market). Basket. Clippers play in the same city/stadium where Lakers play and they are not even close to be a global market team. Base. Marlins already spent a lot of money. Nobody follow them in FLorida. They are trying to gain loyalty, first, in their hometown. Going to take time. ETc... BTW I asked for the definition of a market team, no big market city. Still no source.

Share yours and source, and probably we can enrich the discussion. Again, No body follows them. My skins? Even in Mexico they have huge fan base. Please do not compare my skins with the f***ing Nats.

Again, Look at the definition. Its not the case with the Nats. Nobody follows them. Look at Marlins, Steelers and Clippers cases among others and probably you find the answers.

Exactly. Hell, Get a fan base is not easy (media market). It takes a lot of time and championships. It is not Nats' position at all even they improved their team the last couple of seasons.

It doesn't matter where you play. It doesn't matter if you have money. if nobody follows you, theres no way you have a big media market. Hence you are not a big market team. As simple as that. I have no problem with my reading comp. Maybe you have wit yours (no offense) .Take a look at the definition.

Are you suggesting that the Washington Nationals is a bigger market team than TEX/PHilli? Really? you are confused with the term dude. Take a look at the definition. Nobody is disputing whether they have money to spend or not. They are not a big market team according with the definition. They are not a big media market team. Nobody gives a s*** about the Washington Nationals; DC/US/Global. Their fan base is limited, even in their hometown. Buy advertising in a Nats game is not attractive since nobody follows them, Hence the broadcasters do not compensate them as they do with NY/BOs or even Philli or Tex. Hence, their media market is limited in both domestic and foreign. Hence they are not a big market team. It is conclusive.

So? Nobody give a s*** about them even in their own market.

yup, and mostly globally. Do you really think that foreign broadcasters are interested in transmit The Washington National games? In DC, they do not even care about their team according with the article. The Nats are not even attractive for their local audience. Said that, I wouldn't grade the Nats as a big market team.

Fixed. The Marlins are in that category (who spent most money) and are below us.

According with wiki "In the terminology of professional sports in North America, teams are often said to be based not in a city but in a media market. The size of the media market is usually a good indication of the potential viability of a major league team" The Washington Nationals' global media market is not as big as big media market teams like Boston or NY. Not even close.

Chevere.

Maybe just stick with saying "I totally agree" to UN? posts.

Nobody is disputing the ability to spend. Marlins have spent tons of money this year and I bet that they do not receive the same compensation/revenue/gross margin/exposure/popularity than big market teams receive like Boston/NY via Broadcast/merchandise/tickets/advertising, etc. in both domestic and foreign.

Nope. I said that Nats are not a big market team. You said that DC is not a small market place. Sorry, You are confused.

Are you suggesting that the Nats is a big market team?

What percent does it represent, globally?

Well, he is 26, isn't he? and he is a 4.0 ERA pitcher...he probably could improve, who knows?...

Lannan is cost controlled till 2014, isn't he? I really doubt that Nats trade him for bulks like Lars Anderson. If they trade him, they will ask top prospects. He has not even reached his prime, has he?